<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/></head><body style="font-family:Geneva,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">Dear James,<br />
<br />
> So wouldn't the best change be to allow up to allocation window<br />
> per annum plus an ability to go via the RIPE NCC for further<br />
> sub-allocations?<br />
<br />
What you mean when tell about "allocation window"? Do you mean assignment window? <br />
<br />
--<br />
Kind regards,<br />
Alexey Ivanov<br />
<br />
03.10.2012 20:02 - James Blessing написал(а):<br />
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt" type="cite">
On 3 October 2012 15:21, LeaderTelecom B.V. <info@leadertelecom.nl> wrote:<br />
> You can sub-allocate up to a /20 every twelve months to a single downstream<br />
> Internet Service Provider (ISP). The minimum sub-allocation size is a /24.<br />
> This is the smallest prefix length that can be reverse delegated and that<br />
> allows for a reasonable number of small assignments to be made by a<br />
> downstream network operator.<br />
<br />
Okay<br />
<br />
So wouldn't the best change be to allow up to allocation window per<br />
annum plus an ability to go via the RIPE NCC for further<br />
sub-allocations?<br />
<br />
J<br />
--<br />
<br />
James Blessing<br />
07989 039 476<br />
</div>
</body></html>